I AM a commie - just not a Soviet style communist. This is so typical of Americans (and westerners in general) to simply lump true communists in with Soviets.

Tru communists are those who believe all are equal and that absolutely no one deserves preferential treatment. With the absolution of private property, the public is far better off than in a capitalist society where examples such as private electricity, health care and water services have done nothing but undermine the non-wealthy.

Commie or nazi? I think this is the most ignorant thread I have ever seen started on these boards. The nazis were a particular group that killed millions of people. Communism is an ideology that has drawbacks but many benefits too. If the entire world was communist, you wouldn't have an oligopoly in the "entertainment" industry that has basically destroyed American culture. No Jerry Springer show and no one pandering to the lowest common denominator. No Clear Channel Communications that has basically destroyed the art of radio. You wouldn't have advertising in your face everywhere you go and telemarketers calling your house. There wouldn't be sleezy tabloid shows where they follow around stars and invade their privacy because there would be no profit motive. No huge gap between the rich and poor that leads to anger, resentment and crime and more teen pregnancy.

Communism isn't the answer but out of control capitalism is almost as destructive. Maybe there was little freedom in the communist countries but there is TOO MUCH freedom in America. Life in the U.S. is nothing to brag about.

[quote]Originally posted by yogisfunhouse:
<strong>Tru communists are those who believe all are equal and that absolutely no one deserves preferential treatment. With the absolution of private property, the public is far better off than in a capitalist society where examples such as private electricity, health care and water services have done nothing but undermine the non-wealthy.</strong><hr></blockquote>

while your point is valid..the fact that in a communist socitey somoene who works as hard as they can gets as much of a reward for their hard work as a lazy shit that does the bare minimum or GASP! even nothing... because there is no private property, there would be nothing worthwhile to work for other then the good of the country...and a country that doesnt allow me to do what I want is not a country that I would support...
YES america isnt perfect
YES I do not like a LOT of things about america (entertainment industry and advertizing industry and even the gov't in general)
but the fact of the matter is, in America I @ least have the right to voice my opinions and if necesary fight for my justice and I would have the constitution to back me up...

Edit: and to get back on subject, I would probably choose to fight nazisim and do nothing with communism IE be that lazy shit so I can get all my bills paid for for "free"

"Freedom affords me the opportunity to tell you what an ass you are for having such whiny ass views on our kickass country and how much power our "Western Ways" wields."

There is a difference between freedom and anarchy. Freedom means that each person has the choice to live life the way they want to. You can do whatever you want UNTIL IT STARTS AFFECTING ME. Then there is too much freedom and this is anarchy. And in anarchy everyone loses their freedom.

What if I don't want my kids to see garbage like Jerry Springer or Cops? What if I don't want them to see idiots yelling at each other on Divorce Court? I can't get away from this because it is everywhere in public. In hospitals, restaurants, airports, etc. there is material that is not appropriate for children.

Freedom doesn't mean that you watch whatever you want wherever you want. That way we only get one choice. Freedom means that objectionable material has restictions on it like it used to. Back in the 70s, they only put R-rated movies on at night so parents could control what their kids saw. Now i go into a laundromat and there's cursing, fighting, etc. on the the TV.

I find stuff like Jerry Springer unpleasant because I was raised with values and am not a piece of trash. When I hear about a seventeen year old with two kids I think that it's a heartbreaking tragedy. I don't consider it entertainment. I don't want to desensitize myself to misery for the sake of cheap laughs. You only get one choice in America, which is to see this trash wherever you go.

Face it, all the values that Americans once had and believed in and bragged about are gone. iIf you are under the age of twenty five, you probably don't understand what it means when people live by values. And I am not conservative or religious, just exactly the opposite.

If you'd like me to go one by one through each value that Americans no longer have, I'll be happy to. I'll show you what total hypocrites Americans are.

Here's one. Once upon a time it was believed that children should not witness arguments by parents. Thinking people believed that children should have innocence and that negativity should always be a last resort. Children should not be involved in the emtions of dispute until they are old enought to deal with it in a mature way. Now I see people arguing all the time in front of kids in real life and on garbage shows like Divorce Court. If you're watching adults argue right in front of their chiilden on a TV show, then you are in complete disagreement with the ideals Americans had two generations ago.

"YES I do not like a LOT of things about america (entertainment industry and advertizing industry and even the gov't in general)
but the fact of the matter is, in America I @ least have the right to voice my opinions and if necesary fight for my justice and I would have the constitution to back me up..."

You have the right to voice your opinion but what does that mean and what does that get you in a practical sense? For example, Microsoft is a monopoly and they have almost destroyed all innovation in the computer industry. They could kill Apple by taking away Office. But Americans don't care because they don't fear too much power in so few hands. In fact, they worship concentrated power rather than fear it. Americans have the ability too make things fair but they don't put it into practice.

I have the freedom to say that the Big Five music companies are an oligopoly and that radio stations suck because they are forced to play the same limited selections of songs. I remember when you could hear 100 times as many songs on each stations, not just the big sellers. But since Americans don't care, and they don't have the principles to fear too much power in so few hands, my opinion doesn't count for anything. What's fair and right doesn't guide what happens.

I have a friend from Poland and from talking to him I get a different point of view. In theory Americans have the power of self determination to choose what kind of lives to live and the environment in which to raise their kids. In practice the big corporations push society in whatever direction is most profitable. What good is the possibility of freedom and self determination if you don't put it into practice?

The old Soviet Union was "communist" by name only; the fact that communism's principal figures of the early 20th century aspired to "communism" doesn't mean that the final resulting government was truly communist. There was as much heirarchy and "unequality" as in any western or capitalist nation. True communism on a large or national scale has never existed. The only true communist societies are small, where the individual members are there voluntarily. If forced to, I would belong to a smallscale communist society, such as an Israeli kibbutz. Communism as a political system is all but dead...and a good thing too...but the USA still ultra-paranoid about it.

Re. Naziism...the ugliest system that humanity has devised. And it's far from dead.

Given the unpleasant choice between the two, I would take neither...and if I was killed or imprisoned due to not conforming, then so be it.

Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...

a typical 'pear shaped' forum thread. Starts with a few replies... then bloats to huge replies bitching and eachother about things.

Ah well...

Communism: Great idea, but totally not possible in societies that are too big. Thats why it worked great in smaller tribes and such.

Fascism: Also somewhat good idea, but has always seemigly fubbed up.

I guess democracy is the only way to go...

But to answer the question: From what I have seen, a German Nazi lived and worked pretty damn well. The problem arose when YOU were not a Nazi or on the reciving end of their wrath. I would have to say I would rather be a Nazi in a Nazi society rather than a 'commie' in a soviet style society.

PS Nazi is National Socialism. Its a fascism. So, the question would be better phrased as Nazi or Soviet Commie. OR Communist or Fascist (the two general terms)

I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

[quote]Originally posted by yogisfunhouse:
<strong>I AM a commie - just not a Soviet style communist. This is so typical of Americans (and westerners in general) to simply lump true communists in with Soviets.

Tru communists are those who believe all are equal and that absolutely no one deserves preferential treatment. With the absolution of private property, the public is far better off than in a capitalist society where examples such as private electricity, health care and water services have done nothing but undermine the non-wealthy.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh come on....who made you say that?

You cannot conquer Ireland. You cannot extinguishthe Irish passion for freedom. If our deed has notbeen sufficient to win freedom, then our childrenwill win it by a better deed.Pádraig Pearse

I am just curious to know what anyone finds 'theoretically appealing' about Facism? I can understand what's appealing about Communism (ie. no rich/poor, everything is shared, everyone cooperates for the common good), but Facism (ie. you are property of the state.. if the state (ie. the dictator) decides you are not good for the state (the dictator), you get shot).

Of course, Communism tended to morph into dictatorships little different from facism in real life, but as an ideal, I'm a little disturbed by the people who would rather be nazi than communist.. Or maybe you guys are still in elementary school and haven't taken any european history classes yet It's sometimes hard to tell ages on a messageboard, so pardon me if that's the case.

Hmm, never quite understood the difference. As to which were the bigger scoundrels, thieves, slave masters, and murders? Well, how long did Communism exist vs. National Socialism. Add, subtract, multiply, divide. You do the math

[quote]Originally posted by robo:
<strong>I am just curious to know what anyone finds 'theoretically appealing' about Facism? I can understand what's appealing about Communism (ie. no rich/poor, everything is shared, everyone cooperates for the common good), but Facism (ie. you are property of the state.. if the state (ie. the dictator) decides you are not good for the state (the dictator), you get shot).

Of course, Communism tended to morph into dictatorships little different from facism in real life, but as an ideal, I'm a little disturbed by the people who would rather be nazi than communist.. Or maybe you guys are still in elementary school and haven't taken any european history classes yet It's sometimes hard to tell ages on a messageboard, so pardon me if that's the case.

-robo</strong><hr></blockquote>

The appealing thing about Fascism is that there is still some shred of ability for an individual to excel. In communism, there is not.

I had this argument with a kid last night who claimed to be a "quasi-communist." Truth was that he was just a rebellious high schooler who didn't know what he was talking about. It's the "I want everything to be equal, and everything to be better" argument that fails in communism.

The reason why the Soviet Union fell apart was more economic than anything else. Their producers stopped producing unless they could get some sort of benefits, which is a totally non-communist concept. When a society's creative, intelligent, and productive citizens lose interest, the country goes to hell. That's what communism enables to happen.

Now, there's the "why are you so much of a money grubber" retort. Money = exchange of service. Communism tries to make all services of equal importance, which seems pretty ridiculous, at least to me. There are services that require huge amounts of sacrifice of those who provide them. These tend to be those occupations that require a lot of education and experience. Since almost anyone can be a bricklayer without much of a degree of formal education, and not everybody could be an electrical engineer, even with training, it would seem to me that an electrical engineer is more valuable, since they're harder to come by and train. What better way is there to measure value than through income? The engineer deserves it.

And lastly, in this very country it has been gradually proven that state-owed enterprises are ineffective in rasing the level of technology in the marketplace, and usually fail to serve consumers as well as competitive, privately owed (or corporately owned) businesses. (Think AT&T especially, which wasn't even truly state owned) State-owned businesses are not exacly free of corruption. I believe that there's actually a good bit more corruption with them than in private companies. And worse, when there's corruption in a state-owned enterprise, we all suffer from bad quality and have to fund the wrong doing through taxation. In a case like Enron, there are obvious repercussions, but since investors are the only ones who have to deal with the economic issues, it's less of a public problem that with the state owned enterprise.

Have you ever lived in a country governed by a Communist goverment? Can you name one country where communism has been inflicted on the populace that wasn't a bleak, awful, despair filled hell hole?

Van you name an actual Marxist communist government? All of them were SOOOOOO off the mark. Of course the mark is unacheivable, kinda like an efficient democracy.

Now in a purely ideological sence I would choose communist because the idea is to make the lives of every one equal, Nazism, thats corporatism which is extremely efficient but also houses some awful ideals. Also I have Jewish blood so...

Perhaps a better argument would be commie or facist?

Those who dance the dance must look very foolish to those who can't hear the music

well, economically communism tends to lead to disaster, but the soviet union produced it's fair share of brilliant writers, artists, scientists, and musicians, so your argument that communism stifles excellence is a little off.

I do agree that facism can create a strong economy, and communism cannot, but does that really make facism better?

Anyway, it seems that the ideals of communism are a lot more humane than those of facism, and that would be my reason for choosing communism over facism, ideologically. Of couse, in real life i wolud support neither, but rather, a socialist democracy.. ie. Capitalist society, but with high taxes, Big government spending on social services, small spending on military, no tax breaks for rich individuals and corporations, lower taxes for poor (rather than the opposite, as seems to happen so often in the USA).

Europe and Canada are ahead of the US in this regard, and have shown that it is a system that works, produces a very high standard of living, and is stable (unlike either communism or facism, which fail on most of these counts).

I can't believe it, what kind of an idiot ould even entertain for a minute the "good points" of Nazism.

Murderous, stupidity driven, racist anachronistic, hodge-podge of force driven by an ideal of the "beautiful people" that in reality is an image that is not beautiful but is ugly: Fascism was bad art trying to be government at the expence of real people.

Communism is an idea that cannot work: but is not a malicious idea in the way that Nazism is: Communism idealistically is grounded in the idea of Humanism, meaning its values are derived from the idea that what is human is what is important. The problem is is that it thinks it knows what "humanity" is . . . whereas nobody does.

Nazism on the other hand is not a humanism, it ,in fact, is only the idea that a select few are human, or are "beautiful" and the rest must either dissapear or do as the (usually very stupid but brutal) few say.

Nazism's values have not even the semblance of a respect for others while Communism has the misguided belief that what it does is for the benefit of all.

There should be no comparison.

Now Stalin killed more that Hitler . . . and was just as evil . . . but he also had many many more years to do what he did

anyway Stalinism is not Communism because "Communism" can mean many different things including merely a belief in possibilities while Nazism means only one thing: idiocy, hatred and willfull stupidity

The only reason I can imagine that someone here wold opt fo Nazism is the "snappy outfits" and cool tanks and airplanes --which (if true) shows how Nazism was primarilly motivated by an aesthetic rather than any real political ideas . . . a dangerous blotting out of reality: an art ideal(bad art too) instead of politics.

[ 05-18-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</p>

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes--Franklin Miller.

Only the extreme left wing is intolerant - the whole ideology of the left is be as tolerant as possible.

I believe communism can work - on a smaller scale only though and not through central planning. I would really love to live on a Kibbutz for a while when I finish school - this is as close as a possible one can get to a true comunist society.

I could never chose to be a Nazi over a 'Commie' since I'm Jewish and everyone other than my grandmother was murdered by the Nazis.

[quote]Originally posted by yogisfunhouse:
<strong>I could never chose to be a Nazi over a 'Commie' since I'm Jewish and everyone other than my grandmother was murdered by the Nazis.</strong><hr></blockquote>

well, I don't think anybody today would really contend that Stalin was a real communist.. he was a paranoid, brutal dictator and mass-murderer. Karl Marx was a communist, and all he did was write discourses.

Actually, this silly debate means nothing because of a simple fact:

Nazism was invented by Hitler, who was also a bloodthirsty psychopath.

Communism was invented by some liberal thinkers in the 19th century, and basically existed as some political writings until it inspired revolutions in the early 20th century. Evenutally (decades later) the government of the biggest new 'communist' country, Russia, became headed by Josef Stalin, a bloodthirsty psychopath, just like Hitler. The thing is, Stalin didn't invent communism, in fact, his government was communist more by name than by action.

So, Nazism=Hitler, but Communism!=Stalin, rather Communism=Marx and Engels' writings.

I doubt anyone without a KKK membership card would prefer side with Adolf Hitler rather than with two geeky dudes who are trying to save the world (misguided as they might have been).

[quote]Originally posted by yogisfunhouse:
<strong>I believe communism can work - on a smaller scale only though and not through central planning.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Communism means a complete lack of any social hierarchy. That's why it's unattainable. Ego will always see that, as George Orwell put it, "some are more equal than others." That's why Stalin isn't a true communist -- he managed to bend the political spectrum into a loop where the two apparently diametrically opposed ideologies touched.

We can extrapolate a bit to say that Nazism = fascism. Fascism believes in the power of absolute authority, and that aside from its absolute leaders, individuals do not exist; they are a faceless mass, a collective "it." Communism believes in the absolute equality of all people, thus eliminating individuality as well. Stalin treated the proletariat as a facelss mass as well -- he was the only exception to the rule, and as the cliché goes, one bad Apple spoils the bunch. The fact that Lenin was the hero of the revolution, the de facto leader of the bolsheviks inherently killed true communism in Russia before it really started.